The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement to compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, based on the guidelines of the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority and the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishan Gopal & Anr. Vs. Lala & Ors. Reported in 2014(1) SCC 244.

ORDER

1. The instant Civil Misc. Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred by the claimants-appellants against the judgment and award dated 27.07.2015 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Dungarpur (hereinafter referred to as ’the Learned Tribunal’ for short) in MAC Case No. 515/2014, whereby the learned Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition and awarded compenstion to the tune of Rs.2,63,000/- to the claimants-appellants.

2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that on account of death of one-Naresh Banjara, in a motor vehicular accident, which was occurred on 14.08.2014, due to the negligence of the driver of the vehicle bearing Registration No. RJ 27 TA 1429, the claimants-appellants preferred the claim petition before the learned Tribunal alleging therein that the deceased-Naresh Banjara was about 12 years’ old and was studying at the time of accident and, therefore, seeking total compensation to the tune of Rs. 28,15,000/-, the claim petition was preferred.

3. The respondent Nos.1 to 3 submitted their reply to the claim petition and denied the averments mentioned in the claim petition. Similarly, the respondent No.4-Insurance Company also submitted its reply and submitted that the driver of the offending vehicle was not having effective and valid driving licence at the time of accident and the owner of the offending vehicle also was not having effective permit. Thus, it was submitted that respondent No.4-Insurance company was not liable to satisfy the claim amount.

4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, learned Tribunal framed as many as four issues and after conclusion of the trial, the learned Tribunal vide impugned judgment & award dated 27.07.2015 awarded the total compensation to the tune of Rs.2,63,000/- alongwith interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition i.e 29.09.2014.

5. Challenging the aforesaid judgment and award dated 27.07.2015, learned counsel appearing for the claimants-appellants vehemently submitted that, at the time of accident, the deceased was 12 years old and was studying. The learned tribunal has wrongly considered his income to be Rs.15,000/- on notional basis. Learned counsel for the claimants-appellants further submitted that the learned Tribunal has also committed illegality while not awarding a single penny towards the future prospects. It is also submitted that as per the guidelines of the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, in case of a death of a child between 10 to 15 years, the compensation ought to have been at least Rs. 5 lacs. It is also submitted that the said guidelines have been carved out by the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority on the basis of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court delivered in the case of Kishan Gopal & Anr. Vs. Lala & Ors. Reported in 2014(1) SCC 244.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the claimants-appellants also vehemently submitted that the learned Tribunal has also not awarded amount towards the medical expenses submitted on behalf of the claimant-appellants to the tune of Rs.38,000/-. Thus, it is prayed that the claimants-appellants are entitled a sum of Rs.5,38,000/- as compensation.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant placed before this Court a copy of guidelines dated 15.04.2021 issued by RALSA and a copy of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court delivered in the case of Kishan Gopal & Anr. vs. Lala & Ors. Reported in 2014 (1) SCC 244.

8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Insurance Company vehemently opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the claimants-appellants and submitted that the learned Tribunal after considering of the facts and circumstances of the case has rightly passed the impugned judgment and award and no interference in the same is called for.

9. After having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the rival parties and after perusing the record, it is clear that at the time of accident the deceased was of the a